LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,230
تعداد مقالات11,205
تعداد مشاهده مقاله78,043,853
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله103,666,667
Hosseini, Pegah, Karimi, Mohammad Taghi, Abnavi, Fatemeh, Golabbakhsh, Marzieh. (1396). Evaluation of the efficiency of Minerva collar on cervical spine motions. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 4(2), 47-52. doi: 10.30476/jrsr.2017.41118
Pegah Saddat Hosseini; Mohammad Taghi Karimi; Fatemeh Abnavi; Marzieh Golabbakhsh. "Evaluation of the efficiency of Minerva collar on cervical spine motions". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 4, 2, 1396, 47-52. doi: 10.30476/jrsr.2017.41118
Hosseini, Pegah, Karimi, Mohammad Taghi, Abnavi, Fatemeh, Golabbakhsh, Marzieh. (1396). 'Evaluation of the efficiency of Minerva collar on cervical spine motions', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 4(2), pp. 47-52. doi: 10.30476/jrsr.2017.41118
Hosseini, Pegah, Karimi, Mohammad Taghi, Abnavi, Fatemeh, Golabbakhsh, Marzieh. Evaluation of the efficiency of Minerva collar on cervical spine motions. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1396; 4(2): 47-52. doi: 10.30476/jrsr.2017.41118

Evaluation of the efficiency of Minerva collar on cervical spine motions

Journal of Rehabilitation Sciences & Research
مقاله 4، دوره 4، شماره 2، شهریور 2017، صفحه 47-52    اصل مقاله (1 M)
نوع مقاله: Original Articles
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/jrsr.2017.41118
نویسندگان
Pegah Saddat Hosseini* 1؛ Mohammad Taghi Karimi2؛ Fatemeh Abnavi1؛ Marzieh Golabbakhsh3
1Department of Speech therapy, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
2Department of Orthotics and Prosthetics, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
3Medical Image and Signal Processing Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
چکیده
Background:  Various types of cervical collars have being used to immobilize the cervical spine. There was no information regarding the effectiveness of Cervicothoracic collars (Minerva) on restriction of motions in cervical spine. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the immobilization achieved follow the use of Minerva collar in cervical and Cervicothoracic spine. Methods: Twenty healthy subjects (10 females and 10 males) were recruited in the study with no history of pain, deformity and surgery in spine. A motion analysis system was used to record the motions of cervical, upper thoracic and cervicothoracic in flexion, extension, lateral bending and rotation with and without Minerva collar.Results: The motion restriction of the upper cervical spine obtained with Minerva collar varied between 86.32 and 90%. The range of flexion/extension of cervical and cervicothoracic parts decreased by 27.35 and 56.32%, respectively follow the use of Minerva collar. The flexion/ extension range of motion of this segment decreased by 77.85 and 63.25%, respectively between occiput and T12.Conclusion: The maximum restriction of motion with Minerva collar was achieved in cervical spine. Due to the efficiency of Minerva collar to restrict the motions of cervical, especially in the upper part.
کلیدواژه‌ها
Minerva collar؛ Motion restriction؛ Cervical and Cervicothoracic spine
مراجع
  1. Johnson, R.M., et al., Cervical orthoses. A study comparing their
  2. effectiveness in restricting cervical motion in normal subjects. J
  3. Bone Joint Surg Am, 1977. 59(3): p. 332-339.
  4. White, A.A. and M.M. Panjabi, The problem of clinical instability
  5. in the human spine: a systematic approach. Clinical biomechanics
  6. of the spine, 1990. 2: p. 277-378.
  7. Askins, V. and F.J. Eismont, Efficacy of five cervical orthoses
  8. in restricting cervical motion: a comparison study. Spine, 1997.
  9. (11): p. 1193-1198.
  10. Richter, D., et al., The stabilizing effects of different orthoses in the
  11. intact and unstable upper cervical spine: a cadaver study. Journal
  12. of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 2001. 50(5): p. 848-854.
  13. Barati K, A.M., Vameghi R, Abdoli A, Farmani F., The Effect of
  14. Soft and Rigid Cervical Collars on Head and Neck Immobilization
  15. in Healthy Subjects.11(3):390-395. doi:10.4184/asj.2017.11.3.390.
  16. Asian Spine Journal.11 (3):390-395. doi:10.4184/asj.2017.11.3.390.,
  18. Carter, V.M., et al., The effect of a soft collar, used as normally
  19. recommended or reversed, on three planes of cervical range of
  20. motion. . Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy,
  21. (3): p. 209-215., 1996. .
  22. Chan, R.C., J.F. Schweigel, and G.B. Thompson, Halo-thoracic
  23. brace immobilization in 188 patients with acute cervical spine
  24. injuries. Journal of neurosurgery, 58(4): p. 508-515. , 1983.
  25. Hughes, S.J., How effective is the Newport/Aspen collar? A
  26. prospective radiographic evaluation in healthy adult volunteers.
  27. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 45(2): p. 374-378.,
  29. Kaufman, W.A., et al.,, Comparison of three prefabricated
  30. cervical collars. Orthotics and Prosthetics, 39(4): p. 21-28., 1986.
  31. Sandler, A.J., et al., , The effectiveness of various cervical
  32. orthoses: an in vivo comparison of the mechanical stability
  33. provided by several widely used models. . Spine, 21(14): p. 1624-
  34. , 1996. .
  35. Sawers, A., C.P. DiPaola, and G.R. Rechtine, , Suitability of the
  36. noninvasive halo for cervical spine injuries: a retrospective
  37. analysis of outcomes. . The Spine Journal, 9(3): p. 216-220., 2009.
  38. Whitcroft KL, M.L., Amirfeyz R, Bannister GC. , A Comparison
  39. of Neck Movement in the Soft Cervical Collar and Rigid Cervical
  40. Brace in Healthy Subjects. . Journal of Manipulative and
  41. Physiological Therapeutics. 34(2):119-22., 2011;.
  42. Askins, V.a.F.J.E., Efficacy of five cervical orthoses in restricting
  43. cervical motion: a comparison study. . Spine. 22(11): p. 1193-
  44. , , 1997.
  45. James CY, R.B., Munkasy BA, Joyner AB. , Comparison of
  46. Cervical Spine Motion During Application Among 4 Rigid
  47. Immobilization Collars. . Journal of Athletic Training.39 (2):138-
  48. , 2004;.
  49. Chan, R.C., J.F. Schweigel, and G.B. Thompson, Halo-thoracic
  50. brace immobilization in 188 patients with acute cervical spine
  51. injuries. Journal of neurosurgery, 1983. 58(4): p. 508-515.
  52. Kirshblum, S., et al., Predictors of dysphagia after spinal cord
  53. injury. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 1999.
  54. (9): p. 1101-1105.
  55. Lind, B., H. Sihlbom, and A. Nordwall, Halo-vest treatment of
  56. unstable traumatic cervical spine injuries. Spine, 1988. 13(4):
  57. p. 425-432.
  58. Morishima, N., K. Ohota, and Y. Miura, The influences of Halovest
  59. fixation and cervical hyperextension on swallowing in healthy
  60. volunteers. Spine, 2005. 30(7): p. E179-E182.
  61. Sawers, A., C.P. DiPaola, and G.R. Rechtine, Suitability of the
  62. noninvasive halo for cervical spine injuries: a retrospective
  63. analysis of outcomes. The Spine Journal, 2009. 9(3): p. 216-220.
  64. Stambolis, V., et al., The effects of cervical bracing upon
  65. swallowing in young, normal, healthy volunteers. Dysphagia,
  66. 18(1): p. 39-45.
  67. Goldberg, B. and J.D. Hsu, Atlas of orthoses and assistive devices.
  68. : Mosby Incorporated.
  69. Hashimoto, Y., et al., Intracerebral pneumocephalus and
  70. hemiparesis as a complication of a halo vest in a patient with
  71. multiple myeloma: case report. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine,
  72. 100(4): p. 367-371.
  73. Park, P., et al., Pin-site myiasis: a rare complication of halo
  74. orthosis. Spinal cord, 2005. 43(11): p. 684-686.
  75. Carter, V.M., et al., The effect of a soft collar, used as normally
  76. recommended or reversed, on three planes of cervical range
  77. of motion. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy,
  78. 23(3): p. 209-215.
  79. Kaufman, W.A., et al., Comparison of three prefabricated cervical
  80. collars. Orthotics and Prosthetics, 1986. 39(4): p. 21-28.
  81. Sandler, A.J., et al., The effectiveness of various cervical orthoses:
  82. an in vivo comparison of the mechanical stability provided by
  83. several widely used models. Spine, 1996. 21(14): p. 1624-1629.
  84. Whitcroft, K.L., et al., A comparison of neck movement in the
  85. soft cervical collar and rigid cervical brace in healthy subjects.
  86. Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics. 34(2):
  87. p. 119-122.
  88. Lauweryns, P., Role of conservative treatment of cervical spine
  89. injuries. European Spine Journal. 19(1): p. 23-26.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,180
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,519


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب